in the united states district court for the middle ... · would become known as “munn park”....

Plaintiffs’ Complaint & Application for Injunctive Relief

of 35

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Wade Steven Gardner,

Mary Joyce Stevens,

Randy Whittaker Individually

and his Official Capacity at

Southern War Cry,

Veterans Monuments of America, Inc.,

Andy Strickland, US Army Ret, President

Capt. Phil Walters, In his Official

Capacity as 1st Lt. Commander of the

Judah P. Benjamin Camp #2210

Sons of Confederate Veterans,

Ken Daniel, In his Official

Capacity as Director of Save

Southern Heritage, Inc. Florida

Plaintiffs

v. Civil Action No. 8:18-CV-02843

William Mutz

In his Official Capacity as

Mayor of the City of

Lakeland, Florida

Tony Delgado

In his Official Capacity as

Administrator of the City of Lakeland, Florida

Don Selvege, Individually and

In His Official Capacity as

City of Lakeland, Florida Commissioner

Justin Troller, Individually and



Case 8:18-cv-02843-VMC-JSS Document 1 Filed 11/20/18 Page 1 of 35 PageID 1


of 35

Phillip Walker, Individually and



Antonio Padilla

In his Official

Capacity as President of

Energy Services & Products Corp.

Kenneth Detzner In his Official

Capacity as Secretary of State of

the State of Florida

PLAINTIFFS’ COMPLAINT

& APPLICATION FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

PARTIES

1. Plaintiff, Steve Gardner is a citizen taxpayer of Lakeland, Polk County, Florida.

2. Plaintiff, Randy Whittaker is a citizen taxpayer of Polk County, Florida with

Confederate Dead in his family lineage.

3. Southern War Cry is an organization with over 100,000 members administered by Randy

Whittaker.

4. Plaintiff, Judah P. Benjamin Camp #2201 Sons of Confederate Veterans is a

subdivision of Florida Division Sons of Confederate Veterans, Inc. A Florida non-profit

corporation whose purpose is to ‘vindicate the cause’ for which the Confederate Veteran

fought. They are the successor organization of the United Confederate Veterans, the

membership organization for the soldiers and sailors who served for the Southern

Confederacy during the War of 1861-1865.



of 35

5. Plaintiff, Veterans Monuments of America, Inc. is a non-profit corporation that is

organized under the laws of the State of Florida whose purpose is to protect and preserve

Memorials to American veterans.

6. Plaintiff, Mary Joyce Stevens is an individual who resides in the State of Georgia

and whose Grandmother was President of the Annie H. Darracott Chapter 791, United

Daughters of the Confederacy and herself was a member of the Dixie Lee Chapter of the

Children of the Confederacy, an auxiliary of the Annie H. Darracott Chapter 791, United

Daughters of the Confederacy, and who has Confederate Dead in her family lineage. She

is currently a member of Atlanta Chapter 18, and past president of the James Dunwoody

Bulloch Chapters of the United Daughters of the Confederacy.

7. Plaintiff, Save Southern Heritage, Inc. is South Carolina non-profit corporation whose

purpose is to preserve the history of the south for future generations. The Florida Branch

purpose is to fulfill the organization’s purpose throughout the State of Florida. This

Plaintiff has a particular interest in the Lakeland Cenotaph as the 1910 Cenotaph

represents post-war Florida history during the turn of the century land rush to a newly-

formed City, whose city center would become a landmark and welcoming beacon to

migrants seeking economic prosperity after decades of post-war economic depression.

8. Defendant, William Mutz, is Mayor of the City of Lakeland and is being sued

in his official capacity, as well as individually.

9. Defendant, Don Selvege, is being sued in his official capacity as City of Lakeland

Commissioner, as well as individually.

10. Defendant, Justin Troller is being sued in his official capacity as City of Lakeland

Commissioner, as well as individually.



of 35

11. Defendant, Phillip Walker is being sued in his official capacity as City of Lakeland

Commissioner as well as individually.

12. Defendant, Jim Malless is being sued individually.

13. Defendant, Tony Delgado is being sued individually as well as in his official capacity as

City Administrator for the City of Lakeland.

14. Defendant, Antonio A. Padilla, is being sued individually, as well as in his official

capacity as President of Energy Services & Products Corp a Florida for profit

corporation.

15. Defendant, Kenneth Detzner, is Secretary of the State of Florida and is being sued in his

official capacity.

JURISDICTION

16. The Court has jurisdiction over this lawsuit, because this action arises under the

Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States. 28 U.S.C. § 1331. Pursuant to the

First and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution “Congress shall make no law .

. . abridging the freedom of speech” . . . “[n]or shall any State deprive any person of life,

liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny any person within its

jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” This Court has jurisdiction over the state

law claims asserted herein under the doctrine of pendent jurisdiction.

VENUE

17. Venue is proper in the Middle District under 28 U.S.C. § 1931(B)(2), because all of the

events or omissions giving rise to this claim occurred in the Middle District and because

all of the property at issue is situated in the Middle District. Munn Park and the Munn



of 35

Park Cenotaph (“Cenotaph”) are located in the Middle District, and the defendants’

illegal and unconstitutional actions occurred in the Middle District when they ordered the

unlawful and unconstitutional removal of the Munn Park Cenotaph.

FACTS

18. In 1882, Abraham Munn, a resident of Louisville, Kentucky, purchased 80 acres of land

in what is now downtown Lakeland. In 1883, railroad service was established.

19. In 1884, Mr. Munn platted the acreage and included a traditional “Public Square” in

Lakeland's first subdivision, the original Munn's Subdivision. The entire block was

dedicated by Abraham Munn as a "Public Square" and outdoor meeting place and center

for public debate and discourse into perpetuity, to forever remain in public ownership and

would become known as “Munn Park”. The City of Lakeland was incorporated January

1, 1885, with Park Trammel, a local attorney, the first Mayor.

20. In 1885, Mr. Munn built the Tremont Hotel, said to have been the best hotel in Central

Florida at that time.

21. Munn Park was developed as a focal point as the town’s center for public use, including

walks, bandstand and a well and served as a backdrop to Lakeland's first train station

located at the park's northern border.

22. Veterans of the war of 1861-1865 and their families flooded into the City from states

which were former members of the Confederate States of America (“CSA”) and The

United States of America during the war. They established farms and businesses, and

helped the city grow and prosper. The population exploded ,doubling each decade from

502 in 1890, to 1180 in 1900, and to 3719 in 1910.



of 35

23. In 1902 and 1903, a dry goods store, a furniture store, and a theatre were established on

the periphery of the Park. Some 25 trains were stopping in Lakeland each day. Because

of the excellent railroad service, progressive outlook, attractive location and elevation

(227 feet), the community grew and prospered.

24. Before 1905, the United Confederate Veterans would charter Lakeland Camp 1543. The

United Confederate Veterans was the fraternal membership organization of the veterans

of the War from the Confederate States of America. James Abner Cox and Robert Otho

Cresap were Commander and Adjutant, respectively, of the Camp. Mr. Cox was

approved for a Confederate Veteran’s pension from the State of Florida. His application

states that he moved to Polk County on July 10, 1889, and he had served in a Mississippi

unit. The Polk County Commission approved his application on August 5, 1907, and

forwarded it to the State of Florida Pension Department, who approved it on August 8,

1907. He was approved to receive $120 per annum. Mr. Cox’ application stated he was

combat wounded in the thigh at Fredricksburg. He resided in Kathleen at the time of his

application. Burial records indicate that he died on 15 May 1923, aged 85, and is interred

at Lakeview Cemetery in Lakeland, Polk County, Florida. A photograph of James Abner

Cox shows him wearing the UDC’s Southern Cross of Honor, which was bestowed by

the UDC on the Southern veterans in absentia its official government.

Mr. Cresap was also approved for a Florida Confederate Veteran Pension. His

application states that he was born in Kentucky and served in a Kentucky Cavalry unit

and moved to Polk County in April 1887. He resided in Lakeland when his $100 per

annum Pension was approved on December 28, 1907. Burial records indicate that he



of 35

died on 11 January 1941, aged 97, and is interred in Lakeview Cemetery in Lakeland,

Polk County, Florida.

25. On June 3, 1908, the City Minutes record that a petition by the UDC to erect a monument

in Munn Park was approved. All donors, and the petitioning Chapter (Annie H. Darracott

#791) as well as the city fathers had the expectation of permanency for such a large and

expensive undertaking.

26. For many years prior to and after the approval, the UDC raised funds for the Cenotaph,

by holding and approving tag day sales, bazaars, bake sales, ice cream socials, and

lemonade stands. The City united behind the effort as baseball game proceeds, shows

and plays proceeds, and donations from merchants, residents, and the City itself, were

added to the funds the ladies raised for the Cenotaph.

27. During the Cenotaph’s fundraising period, three more structures were erected

surrounding Munn Park, including a residence (1905), telephone and telegraph office

(1907) and another hotel (1908).

28. With the Donations, the Munn Park Cenotaph was designed, ordered, purchased and

erected by the Annie H. Darracott Chapter 791 United Daughters of the Confederacy as

directed by the City in the center of Munn Park.

29. The massive 26’ foot 2 ½ story, approximately 14 ton Cenotaph, with base dimensions of

9’ by 9’ was dedicated on June 3 1910, only 15 years and 6 mos. after the founding of the

City.

30. The Cenotaph was dedicated on June 3, 1910. The dedication address was delivered by a

prominent Lakeland figure, former City Mayor Park Trammel (1899-1903) who had gone

on to serve as the 21st Governor of Florida (1904-1908) and was serving as U. S. senator



of 35

(1909-1913) at the time of the Dedication. The ceremony was attended by then Lakeland

Mayor W. K. Jackson and contemporaneous news reports described it as ‘probably the

largest crowd in her [Lakeland’s] history’.

31. At the time of the decision by the City Commission, as well as at the time of the erection

of the Cenotaph, women in the State of Florida could not vote, and the 19th

Amendment

to the U.S. Constitution had not been ratified. The UDC members were suffering dis-

enfranchisement from the political process in America. Nonetheless, they achieved

political speech alternatively, through erecting Memorials to their lost husbands, fathers,

brothers, husbands, uncles, and grandfathers. According to the history of the UDC,

through erecting Memorials, “the women of the South have tried to make marble and

bronze tell in chiseled words the glory of the men who wore the gray”. These veterans

had been called upon by their communities, states, and country to defend their homeland.

The Confederate veterans memorialized by the Cenotaph are all now dead.

32. Senator Trammell’s address “paid considerable homage to the service of southern

women on the home front during the war and to the preservation of this spirit by the

UDC,” despite their lack of political status. The monument, he stated, was evidence that

‘the patriotic love and devotion of the women of the South of those days has been

transplanted into the minds and hearts of the present generation”.

33. In 2000, Senator Park Trammel was recognized by the State of Florida by his induction

into the “Great Floridians” program and Senator Trammell is still considered a hometown

hero in Lakeland today, and his home was named by the City to be a “Landmark”.



of 35

34. The ladies of the UDC inscribed the Cenotaph not only with the organizing group’s

name, but also the words “Confederate Dead” in bas-relief on the pedestal base facade.

Higher on a second stage, the Cenotaph is adorned with bas-relief crossed Confederate

Battle flags on staffs, Army of Northern Virginia version, with the numerals“1861”

above and “1865” below the flags, signifying the years of the armed conflict honored by

the Cenotaph and by the people of Lakeland. “CSA” is engraved on the shaft above the

base signifying the Confederate States of America, for whom the Cenotaph’s Dead

memorializes. On the opposite base façade, a poem in bas-relief reads “In memory of

that noble band, who have crossed the mystic stream, and are resting now in that happy

land, where peace and pleasure reign supreme. The heroic deeds will never fade, from

memory's brightest page, and their brave defense of country and home, is left as a

glorious heritage.”

35. At the Dedication Ceremony, it was reported that the UDC ‘presented’ the Monument to

‘The Veterans.”

36. For many, many years to come, the City would continue to develop around Munn Park

and its Cenotaph. Free mail delivery was inaugurated in 1912, and in 1915 the

cornerstone of the first hospital was laid. The Florida land boom of the 1920's resulted in

the construction of many significant structures around Munn Park, a number of which are

today listed on the National Register of Historic Places and the collection today

comprises a National Register Historic District. This list includes the Terrace Hotel, New

Florida Hotel (Lake Mirror Tower Apartments), Polk Theatre, Park Trammell Building

(formerly the Lakeland Public Library and today home to the Lakeland Chamber of

Commerce), and others, which post-date the Cenotaph. Munn Park and the Cenotaph



of 35

were a focal point of, and magnet for, the growth and prosperity that resulted in

Lakeland's “Golden Age.” The town was so attractive that the Cleveland Indian baseball

team held spring training in the City from 1923 to 1927.

37. In 1912, Lakeland Camp 1543, United Confederate Veterans (“UCV”) appeared in the

“Organization of Camps” of the UCV Convention. In 1906, in convention, the UCV

passed a Resolution authorizing the Sons of Confederate Veterans, Inc. to be its successor

organization.

38. Decade after decade, the Monument in Munn Park was a prominent feature of the City’s

landscape, and was featured on tourist literature and picture post cards of Lakeland.

39. In anticipation of the 100th

year anniversary of the incorporation of Lakeland, the City

embarked on a program of historic preservation, passing several ordinances over a span

of multiple decades:

a. On 4 February 1980 the City of Lakeland adopted Ordinance 2175 that

established Historic Preservation Board to oversee the City’s historic preservation

initiative. It was signed into law by Mayor Carrie Oldham.

b. On 7 July 1980, the City adopted Ordinance 2203 (“Protection Ordinance”) for

the specific purpose of establishing a “…historic preservation program…for the

preservation of buildings, structures and sites of historic significance to the

City…and to discourage the demolition of sound structures.” The Ordinance

stated that “No building, structure, or site of any kind shall be erected, altered,

constructed, restored, moved or demolished within the district until an application

for a Certificate of Review …has been approved by the Committee”. “Structure”

was defined as “any improvement to a site which is placed or constructed by man



of 35

regardless of size, material(s) purpose or design.” “Site” was defined to mean “a

piece of ground whether improved or unimproved under single or multiple

ownership by any public or private corporation, association, trust or individual,

or any combination thereof. It was signed into law by Mayor Carrie Oldham.

Ms. Oldham, an educator, has the distinction of being Lakeland’s first African-

American Mayor.

c. On July 7, 1980, the City also passed Ordinance 2204 created the Munn Park

Historic District (“District”) with the stated purpose of the “perpetuation of

historic structures and landmarks” within the Munn Park District. Again, Ms.

Oldham, signed the Ordinance into law.

d. On January 3, 1983, the City amended the Protection Ordinance through passage

of Ordinance 2428, adopting guidelines for reviewing applications for certificates

for review. This was signed into law by Mayor Frank J. Reilly.

e. Two years later, on February 7, 1983, the City passed Ordinance 2440 that

slightly altered the boundaries of the Munn Park Historic District. This

amendment was at the recommendation of Paul L. Weaver, III, Historic Sites

Specialist for the State of Florida Department of State. Mr. Weaver’s

recommendation includes the observation that “the high level of architectural

integrity retained by the majority of the building in the district is unusual for an

urban commercial area in Florida” and consequently “because of the district

itself” he would recommend certifying the District if the boundary amendment

was made. The requested amendment recommended the inclusion of the site of

the All Saint’s Episcopal Church and Lakeland City Hall at 202 South, and 228



of 35

Massachusetts Ave. respectively, on the basis that “their inclusion provides a

clearer sense of the past and present character of the Munn Park District. The

Munn Park District was, and remains, not only a commercial center, but a

religious, civic, and governmental center as well.”

f. 14 years later, on September 15, 1997, the City passed Ordinance 3841 that

ratified the Protection Ordinance but renumbered and added members to the

Historic Preservation Board. The Ordinance was signed into law by Mayor Ralph

L. Fletcher.

g. In the year of the 112th anniversary of the establishment of Lakeland, in

September 1997, the City of Lakeland nominated the Munn Park Historic District,

consisting of 53 contributing resources including:

i. 50 contributing buildings,

ii. 2 contributing site (one being Munn Park),

iii. 1 contributing object (the Cenotaph) and

28 non-contributing resources for National Register of Historic Places

Registration.

h. The Nomination was Certified by the State of Florida the same month and

awarded National Historic Register Designation in November by the U.S.

National Park Service. The contributing resources include Munn Park, the

Cenotaph and the buildings that were constructed and remained from Lakeland’s

earliest years, therein designating the Park and its Cenotaph to be of Historic

significance to Lakeland, the State of Florida and the United States of America.

As a result of the approval of the Nomination, all the historic resources, including



of 35

the Cenotaph were added to the Florida Master File of Historic sites under their

purview and statutory protection.

i. 15 years later, on December 16, 2013, The Protection Ordinance was re-affirmed

when it was incorporated into Article 11 of the City of Lakeland Land

Development Code which was adopted by Ordinance No. 5455. The ordinance

was signed into law by Mayor R. Howard Wiggs.

40. The City of Lakeland installed and maintains a Historic Marker on the base of the Park’s

entry arch that discusses the significance of Historic Munn Park and the Historic

Cenotaph to wit “Munn Park was established in 1884 as a town square in Lakeland's first

subdivision, the original Munn's Subdivision. Later the entire block was dedicated by

Abraham Munn as a "Public Square" in perpetuity, to forever remain in public

ownership. As early as 1889 the site was developed for public use, including walks,

bandstand and a well. About this time it was briefly known as Drane Park and served as a

backdrop to Lakeland's first train station located at the park's northern border. Early in the

20th century the park served as an outdoor meeting place and center of public debate.

Over the years the park has undergone several changes. In 1910 a Confederate monument

was placed in the center of a circular walkway to honor those who died in the Civil War.

Later ponds and gardens were added. In 1961, angular pattern walkways replaced the

circle. A gazebo and the lighted, musical "waltzing waters" fountain were added features.

In 1989 the park was redesigned to enhance the character of the surrounding Munn Park

Historic District. The redesign has taken the park back to the more simplistic "Town

Square Era" in which the district was originally developed.



of 35

The City of Lakeland proudly rededicates this park to the residents of Lakeland and

recognizes the contribution of the Lakeland Area Chamber of Commerce Visual

Improvement.”

41. In various volumes on the history of Lakeland, the significance of Historic Munn Park

and the Historic Cenotaph are referenced.

42. Along various State and Federal highways including Interstate Highway 4, the Munn

Park Historic District is identified with brown Historic District signage.

43. Historic Munn Park and the Historic District are prominently featured in a document

publicized by the Lakeland Downtown Development Authority entitled “A Waking Tour

of Lakeland” that is currently used to promote historical tourism in Lakeland.

44. The Historic Cenotaph in Munn Park is featured as the only Historic resource in the City

of Lakeland in the “Florida Civil War Heritage Trail” historical tourism guidebook

Published by the Florida Department of State, Division of Historical Resources. ISBN

#1-889030-22-7.

45. Through the establishment and continual reaffirmation of the Ordinances, Historic

Nominations with the National Register, and State of Florida Certification, for decades,

the City of Lakeland had a clear policy of protecting its unique cultural and historic

Munn Park District. No City, State, nor National de-commissioning or de-certification of

the historical Cenotaph has occurred.

46. Due to complaints by a small number of city residents, fueled by the National

Association of Colored People “NAACP”, an outside group, presuming without

justification to speak for all African-Americans, despite the fact that the Protection

Ordinance was signed into law by an African-American woman, and which has made a



of 35

practice of demanding removal of Confederate-themed imagery, and on December 4,

2017, at a meeting of the Lakeland City Council, the City Commission voted to ”start the

process” of taking down the Cenotaph, despite its status as a ‘Contributing Object” in the

Historic District, and being the only Object in the District. Commissioners voting to

remove the Cenotaph were: Justin Troller, Don Selvage, Phillip Walker and Jim Malless,

who are named as defendants. This vote is a violation of the City’s own Historic

Preservation Ordinance.

47. In early 2018, through its City manager, Tony Delgado, who is named in his official

capacity as a defendant, obtained a proposal from a contractor to remove the Historic

Cenotaph from its perpetual site in Munn Park in the Munn Park Historic District.

48. At a public Agenda Study Meeting on April 14, 2018, Mayor Bill Mutz, a defendant both

individually and in his official capacity, stated that the Cenotaph would be moved. He

did not mention the Protection Ordinance, national Historic Registry, nor the State

Historic Registry, nor how they were to be overcome these protections.

49. On May 7, 2018 the Lakeland City Commission voted to relocate the Cenotaph from

Historic Munn Park to another site out of the historic district, “provided private donations

paid for the full costs”. The City of Lakeland through Mayor Mutz and through Don

Selvege, personally, began soliciting Private Donations including establishing a ‘Go Fund

Me’ page. Mayor Mutz reportedly used City Taxpayer funds to pay for the postage for a

fundraising letter that was sent to a ‘list’. Despite these efforts, only a fraction of the

necessary Private Donations have materialized. As of October 10, 2018 at 4:48 p.m. only

$26,209 of the $225,000 goal (11.65%) had been reached. Media reports and Former

Michael Dunn stated at City of Lakeland Commission Meeting that the Public is voting



of 35

with their wallets. Donations are not coming in because Lakelanders do not want the

Memorial Cenotaph removed from Munn Park.

50. On June 8, 2018, City Manager Tony Delgado submitted an “Application for

Certification of Review” to the City’s Historic Preservation Board, who is entrusted with

Preservation of the Munn Park Historic District. The Application cites the projection for

consideration to be a ‘Relocation’. This is misleading to the Historic Preservation Board.

On July 26, 2018, the Historic Preservation Board voted to approve the permit.

51. On or about October, 21 2018, Michael Dunn, outspoken Commissioner for preserving

the Munn Park Cenotaph, resigned from office due an unfortunate incident at his retail

store, believed to be unrelated to the Cenotaph. To fill the vacancy on an interim basis,

Mayor Mutz recruited former Commissioner Don Selvege. Selvege was approved by the

Commissioners on October 26, 2018 and was sworn in the following week. Selvege had

on numerous occasions showed his bias against and disdain for the Memorial publically

likening it to a ‘Monument to Hitler”, but on other occasions, wistfully likening it to

himself as a ‘young man doing his duty’.

52. At, arguably, the first opportunity to do so after he was Sworn in, looking for a way to

pay for and to expedite the Memorial’s removal from the Park, at a non-noticed meeting

with no opportunity for citizen input, Commissioners Selvege, Walker and Troller and

Mayor Mutz voted to disregard their May 7th

Commission decision regarding Private

Donations and to proceed with using the City’s Red light Camera funds to take down the

Munn Park Cenotaph. At the Commission’s next public meeting, Citizens voiced their

anger and outrage at the subterfuge and challenged the legality of the process. Finally at



of 35

the end of the discussion, the City Attorney conceded, that decision should come as an

agenda item at a properly-noticed City Commission Meeting.

53. The November 19, 2018 City of Lakeland Commission Meeting includes Agenda item

VII A (Finance Director: Appropriation and Increase in Estimated Revenues from Red

Light Camera Surplus). The City’s web site advertises that the purpose of the Red Light

Camera Program ‘is it to increase overall traffic safety in the City of Lakeland”, but if

used to move the Munn Park Memorial is diverting funds from traffic safety to other

purposes. If adopted at the November 19, 2018 meeting, public funds will be diverted

from the City’s stated purpose of the Rd Light Camera Program.

ALLEGATIONS REGARDING 1ST

AMENDEMENT ABUSES

54. Through the City’s granting of permission to the UDC to install the Cenotaph in its

Public Square, the City agreed to communicate political speech in perpetuity. The UDC

and UCV relied on the agreement and commitment by the City of Lakeland. Now,

however, the Mayor and City Council have breached the City’s promise to communicate

minority political speech.

55. Mary Joyce Stevens, a plaintiff here, a former member of the Lakeland Chapter of the

Children of the Confederacy, is a descendant of a former president of the UDC and is

also a descendant of one honored by the Historic Cenotaph. The City’s action is denying

her the benefit as well as all other like-minded American citizens who wish to publically

honor their family members in a Memorial Cenotaph and express their free speech, from

a Southern perspective about their family’s history who served the Confederacy during

the war of 1861-1865.



of 35

56. The Judah P. Benjamin Camp 2210, Sons of Confederate Veterans, plaintiffs here, is an

organization of lineal descendants of Confederate Veterans which was ‘presented the

Cenotaph” by the UDC, and the successor organization to the United Confederate

Veterans. The Camp’s membership includes descendants who live in the City of

Lakeland whose forebearers are honored by the Historic Cenotaph. The City’s action is

denying them the benefit of expressing their free speech, from a Southern perspective

about their family’s history who served for the Confederacy during the war of 1861-1865.

57. In addition, the City’s decision to take down the Cenotaph and its inscriptions abridge the

Plaintiffs’ political speech. The Historic Cenotaph has been in place for 108 years in a

site created for free speech ‘Public Square’ venue. A state actor cannot prohibit political

speech in a public forum under its control. Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397, 397–98, 109

S. Ct. 2533 (1989). Further, a state actor cannot proscribe nor prescribe the meaning of

political symbols in a public forum. Id. at 415. “If there is any fixed star in our

constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be

orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion or force citizens to

confess by word or act their faith therein. Johnson, 491 U.S. at 415.

Further, the City’s plan to remove the Cenotaph with its inscriptions establishes a

constitutional injury, because some Plaintiffs are descendants of the American veterans

that the statues commemorate and whose memory, acts, and political philosophy

Plaintiffs or Plaintiffs’ forebears have protected since the placement of the Cenotaph in

the 1910. The Free Speech Clause of the U.S. Constitution applies to private speech that

takes place on government property. “Where the government seeks to restrict [private]



of 35

speech by restricting access to its own property, the level of scrutiny to which the

restriction is subjected depends on how the property is categorized as a forum for

speech.” See Cornelius v. NAACP Legal Def. & Educ. Fund, Inc., 473 U.S. 788, 800, 105

S.Ct. 3439 (1985). Government property can be categorized as a traditional public forum

(a space like the public square, “immemorially ... held in trust for the use of the public”),

a designated public forum (purposefully opened by the government as a forum for public

expression) or a non-public forum. Pleasant Grove City, Utah v. Summum, 555 U.S. 469–

70, 129 S.Ct. 1125 (2009); Christian Legal Soc'y v. Martinez, 561 U.S. 661, 679 n. 11,

130 S.Ct. 2971 (2010). There is no question that the UDC intended the Cenotaph to honor

the memory of those who died in service of the Confederacy during the War Between the

states, not limited to those from the area, but also those families relocated to it and sought

to honor those whose grave site was in a far-away state, or known only to God. The

Cenotaph clearly reflected expressions of public mourning, honor and respect for dead

veterans on public property.

The fact that what is now construed to be political speech is memorialized in monuments

and statues does not take away from its value. The City approved of the method and

manner of the UDC’s and SCV’s and its members and other plaintiff’s private speech on

Southern history when it accepted and agreed to the installation of the Cenotaph. As a

public park, created to be the historic Public Square, there is no place that freedom of

speech should be more valued and protected. The City allowed and, in fact, supported

placement of the Cenotaph with full knowledge it was to be a permanent installation. The

cenotaph also has the status of public art.



of 35

58. Further, the City’s plan to remove the Cenotaph with its inscriptions establishes a

constitutional injury, because some Plaintiffs are descendants of the American veterans

that the statues commemorate and whose memory, acts, and political philosophy

Plaintiffs or Plaintiffs’ forebears have protected since the placement of the Cenotaph in

the 1910. The Free Speech Clause of the U.S. Constitution applies to private speech that

takes place on government property. “Where the government seeks to restrict [private]

speech by restricting access to its own property, the level of scrutiny to which the

restriction is subjected depends on how the property is categorized as a forum for

speech.” See Cornelius v. NAACP Legal Def. & Educ. Fund, Inc., 473 U.S. 788, 800, 105

S.Ct. 3439 (1985). Government property can be categorized as a traditional public forum

(a space like the public square, “immemorially ... held in trust for the use of the public”),

a designated public forum (purposefully opened by the government as a forum for public

expression) or a non-public forum. Pleasant Grove City, Utah v. Summum, 555 U.S. 469–

70, 129 S.Ct. 1125 (2009); Christian Legal Soc'y v. Martinez, 561 U.S. 661, 679 n. 11,

130 S.Ct. 2971 (2010). There is no question that the UDC intended the Cenotaph to honor

the memory of those who died in service of the Confederacy during the War Between the

states, not limited to those from the area, but also those families relocated to it and sought

to honor those whose grave site was in a far-away state, or known only to God. The

Cenotaph clearly reflected expressions of public mourning, honor and respect for dead

veterans on public property.

The fact that what is now construed to be political speech is memorialized in monuments

and statues does not take away from its value. The City approved of the method and

manner of the UDC’s and SCV’s and its members and other plaintiff’s private speech on



of 35

Southern history when it accepted and agreed to the installation of the Cenotaph. As a

public park, created to be the historic Public Square, there is no place that freedom of

speech should be more valued and protected. The City allowed and, in fact, supported

placement of the Cenotaph with full knowledge it was to be a permanent installation. The

cenotaph also has the status of public art.

59. Now, the City should not be allowed to silence the political speech because Southern

history has become unpopular with a vocal minority. In fact, Mr. Munn wanted Munn

Park for the very purpose of ensuring that Lakelanders had an outdoor forum for free

speech. The City’s planned removal of the Cenotaph and its inscriptions will eradicate

the political speech Mr. Munn sought and that was utilized by the UDC and authorized by

Lakeland’s City fathers. The City is now seeking to suppress that speech because it now

finds it unpopular or controversial.

ALLEGATIONS REGARDING SOLICITATION OF PRIVATE DONATIONS

60. On May 7, 2018, at its regular meeting, the Lakeland City Commission voted to move its

historic War Memorial Cenotaph from Munn Park to Veterans Park provided Private

Donations would pay the “full costs”. As of July 26, 2018, less than $15,000 of the

estimated $250,000 needed to complete the project had been raised.

61. Mayor Mutz prepared and mailed a fundraising letter asking for donations. The letter

was printed on City of Lakeland Stationary it was mailed in the US Mail with postage

paid for by the City of Lakeland, and it was no doubt printed on city printers, and letters

were most likely signed, folded, and envelopes addressed and letters inserted by city

staff, all using City of Lakeland resources and funds, not Private Donations.



of 35

62. A Response from the City of Lakeland to Florida Public Records Request (F.S. 119)

stated that no public funds were used for this letter. However, Mr. Mutz stated in a City

Public Meeting on Thursday, July 26, 2018 that several hundred letters were mailed.

63. This mailing by Mayor Mutz and the City of Lakeland was in direct violation of the

Commission’s official Action on May 7, 2018, if not the letter of the Action, certainly the

intent of the Action, and therein constitutes Mis-appropriation of taxpayer funds and a

breach of trust of his official duties.

COUNTS

COUNT 1 – VIOLATION OF CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS

UNDER 42 U.S.C. § 1983

64. The City’s decision to take down the Cenotaph including its inscriptions and bas-relief art

(poetic and visual) constitutes a violation of United States Constitution actionable under

42 U.S.C. § 1983. Specifically, the City’s decision to remove the Cenotaph was done

under the color of law as an official action of the City, a state entity (as a chartered

municipality), and deprived Plaintiffs of rights, privileges or immunities secured by the

federal Constitution and laws. Mayor Mutz has abridged Plaintiffs’ right to free speech

and equal protection by deciding to remove the Cenotaph which communicated minority

political speech in a public forum. “[A]bove all else, the First Amendment means that

government has no power to restrict expression because of its message, its ideas, its

subject matter, or its content.” Police Dep’t of City of Chicago v. Mosley, 408 U.S. 92,

95, 92 S. Ct. 2286 (1972).

65. The government does not have a free hand to regulate private speech on government

property. Courts long ago recognized that members of the public retain strong free speech

rights when they venture into public streets and parks, “which ‘have immemorially been



of 35

held in trust for the use of the public and, time out of mind, have been used for purposes

of assembly, communicating thoughts between citizens, and discussing public

questions.’” Perry Ed. Assn. v. Perry Local Educators' Assn., 460 U.S. 37, 45, 103 S.Ct.

948 (1983). The open areas of a Public Square are either traditional or limited public

fora. The decision to remove the statues is not necessary to serve a compelling state

interest nor was the decision to do so narrowly drawn to achieve a compelling state

interest. Further, the decision to remove the Cenotaph was not content-neutral or

reasonable in light of the City’s Diversity policy and Historical Protection policy and

Tourism promotion mission. The City agreed to communicate the UDC’s 1910 political

and religious speech and freedom of expression through art (figurative and poetic) and

now should be enjoined from removing or obscuring the object that communicates this

assemblages of liberties, i.e. the Munn Park Cenotaph and their inscriptions and artwork.

66. Plaintiffs also seek their reasonable attorney and expert’s fees as part of their costs in

bringing their 42 U.S.C. §1983 claim against Mayor Mutz pursuant to 42 U.S. C. §1988.

67. This case is distinguishable from Summum & Walker for the following reasons: 1. The

Suumam Case related to a new park under development in which all monuments would

be perceived as reflecting the current governmental speech. Whereas, in this case, the

century-old speech has been in situ for 108 years; and 2. The facts of the Sumam Case

related to a religious monument that appeared to have breached the Establishment Clause

of the U.S. Constitution, whereas the Munn Park Monument was not erected by any

religions organization nor favored any particular religion.



of 35

68. Additionally, the “Endorsement Test” set out in Lynch v. Donnelly, 465 U.S. 668 (1984)

is an example of a violation of the First Amendment to the Constitution. By removing

the historic Cenotaph, the City is clearly disapproving of the memorial message, which is

an integral part of the Cenotaph’s message, and that of the plaintiffs.

69. Removal of the Cenotaph is an injury to Compelled and Symbolic speech. As evidenced

in United States v. O’Brien, Turner Broadcasting Sys., Inc. v. FCC, 512 U.S. 622, 622,

114 S. CT 2445, 129 L. Ed 2d497 (1994) cited in Foley v. Orange County, the City’s

action is profoundly not content neutral, and in fact, through their actions compelling the

public to express beliefs that they do not hold by publically, emphatically stifling one

point of view. But for the political motives and views of the Defendants, and the

complaints about the content, there would be no reason to believe that the City would

have acted at all. Additionally, the UDC and its members, and the SCV as successor the

UCV, as patron for the artist who devised the art including the sculpture, bas-relief art

and the poem, free speech rights are being infringed by the removal of the Cenotaph from

the Public Square. In Desmond v. Harris (No. 1:16-cv-01206-DAD-BAM) an artist sued

the State of California over its expulsion of his painting that included a Confederate Flag

from public display. The State acquiesced and settled the case and allowed display of the

art.

COUNT 2 - BREACH OF BAILMENT AGREEMENT

70. When the City approved the plans for the Cenotaph, and the UDC fulfilled the plans, a

bailment agreement was created with an expectation of permanency. Neither entity has

lapsed, and without the novation of both parties, the bailment agreement extends into

perpetuity. The UDC has neither asked for the Cenotaph to be returned, nor waived its



of 35

interest in having the Cenotaph remain in place. Arbitrary and unilateral action by the

City is a breach of the Bailment Agreement.

COUNT 3 – VIOLATION OF PUBLIC TRUST

71. When the City breached the Bailment Agreement with the UDC, it abridged the public’s

ability to publicly mourn, pay respects to, memorialize and community the Southern

point of view about the war and the sacrifice of American veterans, including those who

served for the Confederacy during the War. This Violation affects the plaintiff, Mary

Stevens, and others like her, as descendants and family members of “Our Confederate

Dead” inscribed on the Cenotaph, as well as all persons who were intended to benefit

from the Agreement, including Steven Gardner, the inchoate Veterans Monuments

Association of America, Inc., as well as all other like-minded Florida and American

citizens who wish to honor history from a Southern perspective as well as American

veterans. As a taxpaying resident of the City of Lakeland, plaintiff Gardner and is

particularly sensitive to this issue.

72. When Mayor Mutz and the City of Lakeland used Public Funds to solicit Private

Donations for removal of the Memorial, they violated their Official Action on May 7,

2018 which required only Private Funds to pay for the “full costs” of the removal.

Plaintiffs Steven Gardner and Randy Whittiker as taxpaying residents of the City of

Lakeland, are particularly sensitive to this issue.

73. When Mayor Mutz, Commissioners Troller, Walter and Selvege voted to allocate Red-

Light Camera Funds to pay to remove the Munn Park Memorial Cenotaph in a non-

noticed meeting, they signaled their willingness to disregard the City’s stated public



of 35

purpose of the Red Light Camera Program, i.e. ‘to increase overall traffic safety in the

City of Lakeland”, and do diverting funds from traffic safety to other purposes. If

adopted at the November 19, 2018 meeting, public funds will be diverted from the City’s

stated purpose of the program of ‘traffic safety’. Plaintiff Steven Gardner as taxpaying

residents of the City of Lakeland, is particularly sensitive to this issue.

74. By falsifying the Permit Application to the Historic Preservation Board, by misusing

Public Funds to generate Private Donations in circumvention of official Action of the

Commission, by failing to accurately respond to the Public Records Request regarding

mailing of Mayor Mutz’ donation solicitation letter and by the surreptitious

encroachment on the City’s Red Light Camera Funds for removal of the Cenotaph, the

City of Lakeland, Manager Delgado, Mayor Mutz have exhibited a pattern of

disregarding the public’s wishes and mis-representing and failure to make necessary

disclosures to the public.

COUNT 4 – BREACH OF DUE PROCESS

UNDER 28 U.S. C. 2201 75. The City is obligated to provide Plantiffs and other like-minded Florida and American

citizens due process, including reasonable notice, an opportunity to be heard and a

hearing before a neutral arbiter, before removing the Historic Munn Park Cenotaph. In

this case, due process additionally includes review by the Historic Preservation Board,

This declaration is sought pursuant to 28 U.S. C. 2201. Plaintiffs also seek attorney’s

fees and costs in conjunction with their declaratory judgment claim.



of 35

COUNT 5 – VIOLATION OF LAKELAND’S HISTORIC PRESERVATION

ORDINANCE

76. In deciding to remove the Munn Park Cenotaph, the City of Lakeland knowingly and

intentionally violated its own Land Development Code Article 11: Historic Preservation

Standards. The City Manager’s application to the Historic Preservation Board for a

‘relocation’ of the Cenotaph suggests that it will be relocated somewhere else in the

District, but that is not the case and is in the best case confusing, and in the worst case,

fraudulent in that the City Commission voted to relocate it to a modern park outside of

the Historic District, therein Removing or “Demolishing” it from the District. Article 11

of the City’s Land Use Code states “Demolition is generally discouraged and shall be

reviewed with regards to three factors: 1. Architectural significance, based on

documentation of the property’s architectural integrity and historical or cultural

significance; 2. Contribution of the building or structure to the history or origins of the

historic district; 3. The future utilization of the site, including any replacement buildings

or structures. Since the Historic Munn Park Cenotaph is the one of the oldest structures

in the oldest Historic District in Lakeland, and is the only ‘contributing object’, its

contribution to and historical and cultural significance to the District is not only self-

evident but is documented in the Application to the State of Florida for the Munn Park

Historic District. When the Munn Park Historic District Nomination was approved by

the State of Florida, the Cenotaph was added to the State of Florida Department of State’s

Historic Site Master File, and was thus acknowledged by all parties as a significant

Florida Historic Site. No future use for the site of the Cenotaph has was presented to the

Board.



of 35

Additionally, Manager Delgado knowingly and intentionally violated the City Code by

submitting an misleading Application.

Plaintiffs have been injured by City who arbitrarily and unilaterally eradicated the

assemblage of Constitutional liberties that has been enjoyed in Historic District since

1910, that the Defendant have sworn to protect.

COUNT 6 – INTENT AND COLLUSION TO VIOLATE FLORIDA STATUTES

XLVI: 872.02

77. Defendants William Mutz, Tony Delago, Don Selvege, Justin Troller, Phillip Walker, Jim

Malless, Antonio A. Padilla colluded with intent to violate Florida Statue 872.02(1)(a)

and commit a felony of the third degree by voting to remove, proposing to remove,

estimating costs to remove a structure designed as a Memorial for the dead.

Injunctive relief is sought to prevent perpetration of a crime against a Memorial to

the Dead.

COUNT 7 – VIOLATION OF FLORIDA STATUTES 267.013

78. Defendant Secretary Detzner violated Florida Statue 267.013 (Division of Historical

Resources; powers and duties) when he neglected to fulfill his duty to take such actions

necessary to protect and preserve a Historic Resource in Lakeland, a subdivision of the

State of Florida. Secretary Detzner cannot arbitrarily choose parts of the Florida Statutes

to which he chooses to comply. This is a clear violation of the Equal Protection Clause

of the 14th

Amendment to the United States Constitution. The Munn Park Historic

Cenotaph, as a Contributing Object to the Munn Park National Register Historic District,

as certified by the State of Florida is self-evident to be a Historic Resource protected by

the Secretary of State. The Defendant is neglecting his affirmative duty to the detriment



of 35

of the citizens of Florida whose precious, perishable Historic Resources are being

diminished under his administration, such duty to be exercised without regard to political

influence or content expression.

REQUEST FOR INJUCTIVE RELIEF THROUGH TEMPORARY

RESTRAINING ORDER AND DECLATORY JUDGMENT

79. An Affidavit that proves the allegations in the application for injunctive relief and

Temporary Restraining Order are attached and incorporated by reference.

80. Plaintiffs will likely suffer imminent irreparable injury, if Mayor Mutz, Antonio A.

Padillo and Administrator Delgado are not restrained from removing the Cenotaph. Of

the 4 other circa 1900 Cenotaphs that have been taken down in Florida, half were

irreparably damaged during the process. Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(b)(1); Winter v. Natural

Resources Defense Council, Inc., 555 U.S. 7, 22, 129 S. Ct. 365 (2008). Mayor Mutz

public stated that the Cenotaph will come down and the Plaintiffs believe that the City

will act immediately to take down the Cenotaph to American veterans and disavow the

sacrifices of their families and extinguish the assemblage of Constitutional Liberties the

Cenotaph represents without notice, because of his previous statements and the pattern of

conduct established in other Florida communities. Plaintiff’s note: The same contractor

has been engaged without full bid process as was engaged in an adjacent County for the

same purpose. Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(b)(1); Winter, 555 U.S. at 22. “The loss of First

Amendment interests were either threatened or in fact are being impaired at the time

relief was sought. The loss of First Amendment freedoms, for even minimal periods of

time, unquestionably constitutes irreparable injury.” Elrod v. Burns, 427 U.S. 347, 373,

96 S. Ct. 2673 (1976).



of 35

81. Mayor Mutz is a state actor who is ordaining the political meaning of political, religious

and artistic expression in a public forum. This government determination of expression

in a public forum without a showing of any compelling interest in making the

determination and without due process and without an independent arbiter is a continuing

irreparable harm, as contemplated under Texas v. Johnson and Elrod v. Burns.

82. There is no adequate remedy at law, because any legal remedy would be merely illusory.

Northern Cal. Power Agency v. Grace Geothermal Corp., 469 U.S. 1306, 105 S. Ct. 459

(1984). The denial of free speech and due process on a continuing basis cannot be

readily reduced to monetary damages. The only adequate remedy to the abridgment of

free speech is the injunctive demand to resume the abridged assemblage of Constitutional

liberties and to provide the denied due process.

83. There is a substantial likelihood that the plaintiffs will prevail on the merits. Doran v.

Salem Inn, Inc., 422 U.S. 922, 931, 95 S. Ct. 2561 (1975). Defendants have expressly

abridged the aforementioned assemblage of Constitutional represented represented by the

Cenotaph and attempted to substitute a new interpretation of the Cenotaph’s meaning.

Case law on this issue clearly shows that government actors may not enforce their own

interpretation of political messages on political symbols. Johnson, 491 U.S. at 415.

Plaintiffs are confident that the Court will agree that the Defendants are abridging the

long-standing tradition of freedom of expression in a public forum, which should be

remedied by the Court’s authority.

84. The on-going harm to Plaintiffs outweighs the harm that a temporary restraining order

would inflict on the City of Lakeland Winter, 555 U.S. at 24; Yakus v. United States, 321

U.S. 414, 440, 64 S. Ct. 660 (1944). Plaintiffs are already experiencing continuing harm



of 35

by the decision to deny freedom of expression communicated by the Cenotaph and its

inscriptions in bas-relief. Elrod, 427 U.S. at 373. Mayor Mutz and the other Defendants

will suffer no harm by allowing the Cenotaph to stay in place.

85. Issuance of a temporary restraining order would not adversely affect the public interest

and public policy, because issuance of the order would serve the public interest. See

Winter, 555 U.S. at 24-26. Indeed, the benefit to third parties would be enormous, as the

display of the direct, factual inscriptions on the plinths, such as “Our Confederate Dead”

would allow everyone in this public forum in the Public Square to appreciate that historic

facts pose no actual harm. Indeed, the order would mark the end of the Orwellian terror

that Mayor Mutz is attempting to inflict on the public and the plaintiffs.

Plaintiffs are willing to post a bond in the amount the Court deems appropriate.

However, Plaintiffs are filing this cause in the public interest and request that the Court

order no or a nominal bond. Kaepa, Inc., v. Achilles Corp., 76 F.3d 624, 628 (5th Cir.

1996). Firstly, neither the City of Lakeland nor any Defendant stands in financial risk by

the issuance of the requested injunction. Secondly, Plaintiffs are suing in the public

interest and stand to recover no damages in this action, or other compensation other than

attorneys fees and costs under 42 U.S.C. §1988, 28 U.S.C. §2201.

86. The Court should enter this temporary restraining order without notice to Mayor Mutz

because Plaintiffs will likely suffer immediate and irreparable injury, loss, or damage if

the order is not granted before this Action can be heard and there is no less drastic way to

protect plaintiffs’ interests. Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(b)(1); Garcia v. Yonkers Sch. Dist., 561

F.3d 97, 106 (2d Cir. 2009); see also Benchbook for U.S. District Court Judges, at 239.

The course of dealing in Florida has often been to remove public Memorials without



of 35

notice and under cover of darkness. Plaintiffs have reason to believe that Mayor Mutz

will once again, following these precedents, surreptitiously remove the Cenotaph without

notice in the dead of night. Plaintiffs believe that were the Mayor to receive notice that

this Court was contemplating an injunction to protect the Cenotaph, the Mayor would

accelerate the removal of the Cenotaph.

87. Plaintiffs ask the Court to set the request for Injunctive Relief in the form of a

Temporary Restraining Order, followed by Preliminary Injunction Hearing at the

EARLIEST POSSIBLE TIME.

J. CONCLUSION

88. Plaintiffs have proper jurisdiction and venue to appear before the Court and request

injunctive relief. The defendants are in imminent danger of irreparable infringement of

their 1st Amendments rights. The City has breached their bailment agreement with the

UDC, violated its trust with the Citizens of Lakeland, violated its own ordinances and

trampled on the assemblage of well-recognized Constitutional liberties enjoyed by the

citizenry through the Historic Munn Park Cenotaph. The Plaintiffs are particularly

sensitive to the issues raised in this Complaint and uniquely suitable as plaintiffs due to

their connections, agreements, missions and lineage.

In addition, Secretary Ditzner has violated State Law by neglecting to protect the

Historical Resource owned by the citizens of Florida.

Finally, the Defendents, Padillo, Delgado Mayor Mutz and others seem to be in a

conspiracy to violate Florida State Law that prevents altering a Memorial site.



of 35

This Federal Court has the proper jurisdiction to discipline an officer of the State of

Florida and require him to do his duty, and it is the Federal Court which has the highest

duty to protect the assemblage of Constitutional liberties affected by the removal of the

Historic Munn Park Cenotaph.

Plaintiffs are concerned that the Defendants will move swiftly and unilaterally to

eradicate freedom of expression and the plaintiffs will suffer irreparable harm by the

removal of the Munn Park Cenotaph if injunctive relief through a Temporary Restraining

Order is not issued immediately.

For these reasons, Plaintiffs ask the Court to issue an emergency Temporary Restraining

Order preventing Defendants the City of Lakeland, or its agents, including Energy

Services Corp. from removing any or all of the Historic Munn Park Cenotaph or

obscuring or infringing it in any way.

K. PRAYER

89. For these reasons, Plaintiffs ask that the Court do the following:

a. Order that the City not take down the Munn Park Historic Cenotaph;

b. Order that City does not infringe on the inscriptions or symbolism etched into the

Historic Munn Park Cenotaph in any way;

c. Enter judgment for Plaintiffs;



of 35

d. Award costs of suit to Plaintiffs; and

e. Award attorney and expert’s fees pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1988, 28 U.S.C. §2201.

f. Plaintiffs further ask the Court for any and all relief to which Plaintiffs may show

they are entitled.

Respectfully submitted,

By: ________________________________

DAVID RHODES MCCALLISTER,

Trial Counsel, for all Plaintiffs

Florida Bar No. 724637

E-mail [email protected]

Tel. (813) 973-4319

Fax (352) 260-0157


mailto:[email protected]

Brandi

DRM


of 35

STATE OF FLORIDA

PASCO COUNTY

AFFIDAVIT OF DAVID RHODES MCCALLISTER

Before me, the undersigned notary, on this day personally appeared David Rhodes

McCallister affiant, a person whose identity is known to me. After I administered an oath,

affiant testified as follows:

1. “My name is David Rhodes McCallister. I am competent to make this affidavit.

The facts stated in the First Amended Original Complaint & Application for Temporary

Restraining Order are within my personal knowledge and are true and correct.

2. I have been reading news articles, talking with witnesses, and reading statements

made by the parties in this matter.”

______________________________________

DAVID R. MCCALLISTER

SWORN TO and SUBSCRIBED before me by David Rhodes McCallister on November

19, 2018.

___________________________________

Notary Public in and for

The State of Florida


Brandi

DRM

Brandi

BKH

Brandi

BKH Notary

in the united states district court for the middle ... · would become known as “munn park”....

Documents